Macros vs Calories

donnertrud

Hi guys

I love using myfitnesspal , it makes eating and especially flexible eating so much easier. However , I encountered a problem :

I am trying to eat 3600 calories everyday, and I split this up with 60% carbs 20% protein 20% fats. So far so good.
What I have been doing the last few weeks, was hitting my CALORIES using myfitnesspal. So at the end of the day it there were +- zero calories remaining. Of course I also aim at the prescribed carbs / pro / fat amounts. I always hit the 180g of protein pretty accurately, same with fats. But I never mit my carb goal, since calories seem to be higher than the macros I hit.
For Example :

Today I hit

80g fat , my goal is 79g
192g of protein, my goal is 178g
450g of cars, my goal is 533 !!!


So if you try to calculate the calories ( 80*9,3 + 192*4,1 + 450*4,1 ) you end up with something like 3450 , which is 150 calories less, but myfitnesspal tells me that there are zero calories left to eat today.. And I checked the last few days , as a matter of fact I always hit my calories but never hit my macros , because the macros never add up to the 3600 calories.

So what should i be aiming for, the macros ( and thus probably always have negative calories left every day ) or the calories ?

Sorry for my bad english btw hope you still got my issue

SweatLikeDog

The only calories in food are carbs, proteins, fats, and alcohol. If your macro calculations don't match the calories in the foods, then there was a mistake in the MFP database. Someone entered the wrong amount of calories or macros for the foods you selected. Compare the labels on the food to the numbers you entered.

donnertrud

I already did that and it seems that some food labels round their calories or something. I calculated the numbers on the label and it rarely adds up 100%. Most of the time the difference is not more than 10 calories, however with in intake of 3600 those small diffenreces seem to add up . My question basically is , whats more accurate, the calories or the macros on the labels ?

3laine75

I consider protein and fat minimums - helps me justify going over the fat macro =D

usmcmp

What's more accurate? Depends on the food. Quest bars have accurate macros, the calories are off. Also, if you weigh packaged food you'll find that the packages sometimes have more or less than stated. A can of vegetables drained may say 3 servings and only be 2.25 servings.

SweatLikeDog

They are all estimates. Neither is more accurate. If you're eating above maintenance level, macros are less critical than if you are at or below maintenance. Natural foods are probably easier to track because their macros don't rely on processing.

Firehawk734

I think sometimes 'net carbs' are counted and not total carbs...but I have the same issue.

Just stuff your face .

FitMelody4Life

I always follow macros, not calories

BusyRaeNOTBusty

The differences are in rounding errors. Nothing really has exactly 11grams of protien. It's probably 11.2.

1. Don't try to be too perfect

2. You don't have to hit your carb goal.